PING Re: [PATCH] Fortran: Remove double spaces in open() warning [PR99884]
yearly ping. Ok for trunk after re-regtesting?
thanks,
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:57:46 +0100
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>
> gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
>
> PR fortran/99884
> * io.c (check_open_constraints): Remove double spaces.
> ---
> gcc/fortran/io.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/io.c b/gcc/fortran/io.c
> index fc97df79eca..9506f35008e 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/io.c
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/io.c
> @@ -2513,7 +2513,7 @@ check_open_constraints (gfc_open *open, locus *where)
> spec = "";
> }
>
> - warn_or_error (G_("%s specifier at %L not allowed in OPEN statement
> for "
> + warn_or_error (G_("%sspecifier at %L not allowed in OPEN statement for
> "
>"unformatted I/O"), spec, loc);
> }
>
Re: PING Re: [PATCH] Fortran: Remove double spaces in open() warning [PR99884]
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 10:10 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via
Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> yearly ping. Ok for trunk after re-regtesting?
OK.
> thanks,
>
> On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:57:46 +0100
> Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>
> > From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> >
> > gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
> >
> > PR fortran/99884
> > * io.c (check_open_constraints): Remove double spaces.
> > ---
> > gcc/fortran/io.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/io.c b/gcc/fortran/io.c
> > index fc97df79eca..9506f35008e 100644
> > --- a/gcc/fortran/io.c
> > +++ b/gcc/fortran/io.c
> > @@ -2513,7 +2513,7 @@ check_open_constraints (gfc_open *open, locus *where)
> > spec = "";
> > }
> >
> > - warn_or_error (G_("%s specifier at %L not allowed in OPEN statement
> > for "
> > + warn_or_error (G_("%sspecifier at %L not allowed in OPEN statement
> > for "
> >"unformatted I/O"), spec, loc);
> > }
> >
>
Re: [PATCH] Fortran: fix treatment of character, value, optional dummy arguments [PR107444]
On Nov 13 2022, Harald Anlauf wrote: > Can you please confirm that it fixes your issues? Looks good. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1 "And now for something completely different."
GCC 13.0.0 Status Report (2022-11-14), Stage 3 in effect now
Status == The GCC development branch which will become GCC 13 is now in bugfixing mode (Stage 3) until the end of Jan 15th. As usual the first weeks of Stage 3 are used to feature patches posted late during Stage 1. At some point unreviewed features need to be postponed for the next Stage 1. Quality Data Priority # Change from last report --- --- P1 33 P2 473 P3 113 + 29 P4 253 + 6 P5 25 --- --- Total P1-P3 619 + 29 Total 897 + 35 Previous Report === https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2022-October/239690.html
Re: GCC 13.0.0 Status Report (2022-11-14), Stage 3 in effect now
Hi Martin, Is it allowed to merge libsanitizer from LLVM in stage 3? If not I'd like to cherry pick some commits from LLVM [to fix some stupid errors I've made in LoongArch libasan :(]. On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 13:21 +, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote: > Status > == > > The GCC development branch which will become GCC 13 is now in > bugfixing mode (Stage 3) until the end of Jan 15th. > > As usual the first weeks of Stage 3 are used to feature patches > posted late during Stage 1. At some point unreviewed features > need to be postponed for the next Stage 1. > > > Quality Data > > > Priority # Change from last report > --- --- > P1 33 > P2 473 > P3 113 + 29 > P4 253 + 6 > P5 25 > --- --- > Total P1-P3 619 + 29 > Total 897 + 35 > > > Previous Report > === > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2022-October/239690.html -- Xi Ruoyao School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
Re: [PATCH 1/5] c: Set the locus of the function result decl
On Sun, 13 Nov 2022, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc-patches wrote: > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_86-unknown-linux with no regressions. > Ok for trunk? > > Cc: Joseph Myers > --- > gcc/c/ChangeLog: > > * c-decl.cc (start_function): Set the result decl source > location to the location of the typespec. OK. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
